TOW #30: Letter to a New APELC Student

Dear future APELC student,

     First, I want to congratulate you on choosing to take AP English Language and Composition; it's a challenging course. Understand that this course will be different from other English courses you have taken in the past, and not only because it is an AP course. For one thing, there was a lot more writing involved, as is to be expected. But along with having more in-class writing assignments, you will have more interesting, meaningful prompts. Rather than being graded on how accurate you were, you will be graded based on how well you can present and support your ideas. There really are no wrong answers. Also, APELC will expose you to a new type of writing which, if you are like me, you will have never read before. Likewise, the projects will be different in that they will be more based on your interpretation of someone else's ideas rather than just someone else's ideas. Along with every other aspect, the readings will get harder. Whereas before you might have been able to read a passage and immediately pull the "right" idea from it, it will not be so easy this year and that may not even be the point of reading the passage.
     As for advice, I would say that it is important to keep up with the readings and you want to start into take-home essays and projects as soon as you can. But in this course, I would also recommend that you try to complete for understanding and not just for completion. Although sometimes it is necessary to finish something simply so you get credit, there are more important things at stake in this course. I found that the skills I learned in this class, such as the ability to recognize different types of claims, were worth more than the informal credit sometimes given or the ability to participate in class. On the rare occasion that I could not finish the assignment meaningfully, I did sometimes end up skimming the material or ideas, and I always regretted it. If I could give you, incoming APELC students, any one piece of advice it would be to complete assignments for understanding rather than for completion.
     Since this is an AP course, I'm sure you already understand that there may be obstacles and difficulties. What you absolutely need to understand is that it is not a bad thing to experience these obstacles; the only bad thing would be to not try to overcome them. You must try not to let yourself be defeated. And what Mr. Yost says at the beginning of the year is true: some APELC students will get lower grades than they are used to. What is important to remember is that you are not defined by one lower-than-usual grade. I even believe that those who experience more obstacles could potentially be more successful in this course so long as they can overcome the obstacles and learn from them. What you will find is that the obstacles do not disappear, but rather you will get better at dealing with them.
     I personally thought APELC was worth taking, and I am glad you did, too. Even though I do not think I want to be an English major or even minor, I do not regret taking this course, for APELC helped me in almost every other subject. If you work hard and stay confident this year, I have no doubt that you will not only improve your writing and reading style, but also enjoy the interesting topics Mr. Yost introduces to you.

Sincerely,
Former APELC-er Rachel Misbin

P.S. Go all out on toga day, because it's worth it. Togas are both comfortable and fashionable.

TOW #29: Documentary Rhetorical Analysis Part 2

     It is easy to regard someone who is wealthy as content, even fulfilled, and without serious hardship. In today's society in particular, those without wealth are sometimes resented because of the belief that they have no "real" problems. Director Lauren Greenfield would discount that belief. In fact, one of the claims made in Greenfield's documentary The Queen of Versailles is that having wealth does not automatically make one person better than another. Greenfield contrasts Mr. and Mrs. Siegel, in all of their lavish wealth, against their friends, family, and employees, and the result is blatant: whereas the Siegels are very wealthy, they lack the humility, class, sense of fulfillment, and positive morals that the people around them possess. In other words, the Siegels are wealthy but are otherwise no better, if not worse, than the people around them who are not wealthy. Their wealth does not solve all of their problems.
     I strongly agree with Greenfield's claim about wealth and happiness, particularly because I've seen evidence of her claim in my own experiences, observations, and readings. The first thing that comes to my mind is the ever growing list of sayings that all essentially say the same thing: money cannot make you happy. Everyone from Benjamin Franklin to Nelson Mandela have warned of the falsified satisfaction money can provide. I cannot help but believe that Greenfield's claim must be true if only because of its large number of wise supporters. In a way, Greenfield is supporting the claims made by the various people who came to the same conclusion before her. 
     Additionally, I have experienced the validity of Greenfield’s claim in my own life. The satisfaction I get from getting a new item is never as great as the satisfaction I get when I am in the company of people I enjoy, or when I perform an act of kindness, such as volunteering. The immediate happiness from a purchase is fleeting; the only way to maintain such a happiness is to continually spend through what some might call an addiction. However, as with every addiction, the abuser is eventually numbed to what once brought them happiness. “Purchased happiness” must eventually run out, whereas interactive, non-stationary happiness can never be expended.

     While Greenfield claims that wealth and contentment are not necessarily correlated, I might even argue that they are inversely correlated past a certain point. After that point, wherever it may be, as you become wealthier you also become less and else content with your life. For example, in the case of the infamous King Midas from Greek mythology, who could never find satisfaction from his wealth. Though he was wealthy, King Midas reached the point where enough was not enough, and eventually he dedicated himself to accumulating more wealth by wishing for a “golden touch” to turn everything into gold. His resulting wealth cost him everything he cared for, including his health, his daughter, and his happiness. Just as with the Siegels from The Queen of Versailles, wealth did not guarantee happiness and positive morals. 
     There are many cases in which wealthy people are not by any means decent, happy people. Regardless, there will always be people who believe that money is the necessary to achieve happiness, classiness, and positivity. Greenfield's The Queen of Versailles rightly claims otherwise.

TOW #28: Documentary Rhetorical Analysis Part 1

        Throughout America's history, there has existed an "American dream," characterized by a physical and emotional manifest destiny. Some have achieved the manifest destiny by expanding to America's west coast, but for the Siegels, manifest destiny means something else entirely. In The Queen of Versailles, a documentary directed and produced by Lauren Greenfield, it involves redefining luxury. The Queen of Versailles details the lives of the Siegel family before and after the 2008 financial crisis struck. The "queen" referenced in the title refers to Jackie Siegel, resort tycoon David Siegel's pageant wife, and her ceaseless obsession with wealth and beauty. David Siegel was the lavish owner of the now-failing Westgate Resorts company. The main subject and source of conflict of the film is the family's decision to build the Versailles house, modeled after the actual Palace of Versailles built for Louis XIV several hundred years ago. Had the Versailles house been completed, it would have been the most expensive privately held home in America. About halfway into the film, the 2008 crisis hit, leaving once-billionaire David Siegel and his family "struggling" to hold onto their partially-finished Versailles house. The remainder of the film follows the family as they try to hold onto their assets. Meanwhile, the Siegel's friends, employees, and relatives truly struggle to hold onto their homes, emphasizing the ridiculousness of the Siegel's situation.
     The purpose of The Queen of Versailles rings loud and clear, so much so that by the end of the documentary, the Siegels themselves begin to hear the ringing, too. The purpose is to mock the idea of excessive decadence and wealth. To achieve this purpose, the director, Greenfield, uses contrasting characters, ironic music, and hyperbole. Greenfield's use of contrasting characters proves especially effective throughout the documentary. There are two very different types of characters Greenfield features: those who are desperately poor and those who are overtly and excessively wealthy. The poor include Jackie Siegel's family and high school friend as well as the Siegel's Filipino nanny. For example, just after the financial crisis of 2008, Jackie Siegel's best high school friend calls to tell Jackie that her home is being foreclosed while Jackie empathizes from her lavish bedroom which is nearly the size of her friend's entire home. Another example of this contrast occurs when Greenfield focuses in on the Siegel's primary nanny, Virginia, who was originally from the Philippines and has not seen her own children for eleven years because she cannot afford to visit them. The Siegels, in comparison, look foolish and cruel in contrast to Virginia. To further emphasize this contrast, Greenfield shows Virginia's makeshift home, which is actually just a shed-sized playhouse for the Siegel's children, followed by the Siegel's enormous mansion. By comparison to everyone around them, the Siegels are classless, rude, wealthy people who fake empathy for those less fortunate than them.
     Greenfield's use of music has a profound effect on the tone of the documentary. Just as though they were the royal owners of the real Versailles residence, the Seigels waddle around to classical music that might have been suitable background music for Louis XIV himself. For the Siegels, however, this music only serves to point out the ridiculousness of their situation. At several points during the film, the audience sees Jackie Siegel, teetering in high heels, wearing tacky clothing, sporting dreadfully heavy yet ineffective makeup to music that would have been fit for her exact opposite. Whereas classical music generally implies wealth and class, in The Queen of Versailles it highlights the wealth and lack of class. This draws a distinction between wealth and class, illustrating the idea that they do not come hand-in-hand. Although they are wealthy, the Siegels are classless, emphasizing the meaninglessness of wealth. By the end of the film, the audience feels more respect for the financially "poorer" characters and distaste for the Siegels. Additionally, Greenfield uses a special type of hyperbole to achieve her film's purpose. Although she might not have intended to do so, the director depicts every theme not with twinkling lights, but with flashing neon signs, so to speak. To demonstrate the emotional chaos the Siegels endure despite their wealth, Greenfield depicts actual chaos, in which the family's animals are literally running wild and dying. To demonstrate the Siegel's shift in attitude regarding their wealth, Greenfield films ugly, bleak weather along with the character's routine interactions. The effect is very blunt, making it very hard for the viewer not to see Greenfield's point. All things considered, Greenfield achieved her purpose very effectively.

TOW #27: TOW Reflection

In the first TOWs I wrote, I stuck to a certain format; I answered all of the questions separately and then I tried to blend them together into a cohesive TOW as demonstrated by my first marking TOWs, such as TOW #10. This was not as successful as the format I used later in my TOWs, which was much less structured. Also, I noticed that as I slowly abandoned my routine, I also began to write more concisely and artfully. In TOW #22, for example, I used mini transitions to move from idea to idea, which was something I had never done before. I believe I've mastered the writing of introductions and conclusions. Looking back, it has become much easier for me to transition into my idea from nothing and end in a reflective, interesting way. At first, my TOWs were a bit choppy since I had no viable way of introducing and concluding them. Reading my third most recent TOWs compared to my first TOWs, this is where is see the most improvement. Despite my progress, however, I could still improve my ability to write clearly. I tend to write in a way that sounds a bit awkward, and although I think I have improved on my tone throughout this year, I still have some progress to make. I even noticed that I wrote in a way that we'd discussed in class as not so good. In my tenth TOW, for example, I used a double negative, writing "it is not uncommon." I still write in a way that can sound a bit clumsy, so I would still like to improve my tone and stylistic voice. Overall, I definitely did benefit from these assignments considering that I've expanded my horizons in my search for good TOWs. I've also learned to analyze both visual and written texts more effectively. I did not benefit considering the fact that I did not consistently analyze the texts as much as I could have.

TOW #26: "Team Spirit"

College sports, like professional sports, are televised, but college athletes, unlike professional athletes, are not paid. 

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2014/05/12/140512taco_talk_gopnik

   Throughout history, there has been extensive debate over who should receive more money: the overseer or the worker? This same debate has arisen regarding college sports, particularly college football, bringing with it even more issues to consider with college sports. In his article "Team Spirit," Adam Gopnik proposes a couple of changes in the world of college sports. The purpose of "Team Spirit" is to convince readers, athletes, coaches, and colleges to consider changing how athletes transition from the high school sports career to the major league sports career without the need for college, which he argues is pointless anyway since "academic departments... offer non-courses to student athletes who may not even be fully literate" just to allow them to play at their college. To accomplish his purpose, Gopnik uses various examples, rhetorical questions, and analogies. 
     Gopnik references Northwestern University to explain the inequity between the players and the coaches. He cities that Northwestern made two hundred and thirty-five million dollars between 2003 and 2012 from their football program alone; however, players are still not given concussion-testing and inclusive medical coverage. Readers are likely to feel empathy for the football players at Northwestern University because this example generates pathos. This example illustrates how truly unfair the world of college sports, thus supporting Gopnik's idea of reforming college sports. 

     Additionally, Gopnik lets his readers come to his same conclusion by strategically using rhetorical questions. After mentioning the seven million dollar per season paycheck of the coach of the University of Alabama's football team, Gopnik asks "Shouldn’t those who do the work share the wealth?" The result is a dramatic contrast: wealth against poverty, health against illness, the one percent against the ninety-nine percent, all of which Gopnik's readers already have more than likely already thought about, just not yet in relation to college football. 

     By using analogies, Gopnik appeals to readers, such as myself, who do not entirely understand the world of college sports. Gopnik compares college football to a drama program. If the drama program's musical earned a lot of money, enough to pay the teachers involved quite well, it would seem reasonable to pay the student actors involved, although then it wouldn't just be a school drama program. I, at least, can say that this analogy helped me to understand the real conflict with college sports. Overall, Gopnik effectively accomplished his purpose in my opinion.

TOW #25: Bose noise reduction headphones advertisement

      Sometimes exaggeration is necessary to sell a product. In this advertisement marketed by Bose,  the creators employed extreme exaggeration. After all, in a world with such loud noises, a person practically needs Niagara Falls-strength noise cancellation, right? Clearly, the purpose of this advertisement is to convince the viewer to buy a pair of noise-reducing headphones from Bose. The audience includes almost anyone, particularly people who are frequently in noisy areas. To convince viewers to buy from Bose, the creators had to make sure they sent a strong, bold message to the advertisement's viewers, which they accomplished through their use of symbolism, the threatening color scheme, and their appeal to the average buyer.
       The main use of symbolism lies clearly with the Niagara Falls, arguably one of the loudest places in America. Anyone as close to the Falls as the man in the advertisement would be overwhelmed with how loud the Falls were. However, he is not. He's rowing along happily, not hearing the rumble of the Niagara Falls just feet away, all thanks to his Bose "noise-reducing" headphones. In this way, the creators use the viewer's previous knowledge of Niagara Falls to their advantage. Any headphones with enough strength to block out the roar of Niagara Falls should be good enough to cancel just about any sound. This creates the sense that these Bose headphones are well worth whatever cost, helping the viewer to justify his or her potential purchase.
     Additionally, the advertisement's color scheme effectively adds to the overall mood of the advertisement. The dark greens, blues, and white of the image suggest that something is lurking, that something is dangerous. The man in the advertisement, however, does not notice any of this because of his headphones and sunglasses. Only very powerful headphones could convince this rower that his surroundings are not threatening.
     The creators also attempted to appeal to the average buyer by using someone who the buyer might be able to relate to. Since the man in the advertisement is wearing khaki shorts and is paddling, barefoot, a little row boat, along with his very own Bose noise-reducing headphones, potential buyers will not believe that these headphones are over their budget. As a result, the buyer will not feel isolated from Bose; thus, the average viewer is more likely to become a Bose-buyer. The creators of this advertisement effectively presented the viewer with several feasible reasons to buy their product, so I would consider this advertisement successful.

TOW #24: "What Makes an Alien Intelligent?"

If there are aliens out in space, why would we think they would be comparable to us?

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2014/04/what-makes-an-alien-intelligent.html

What if in our great search for other intelligent life, were being a bit... narrow-minded? In an article titled "What Maes an Alien Intelligent?", the author, David Berreby explores that question. He begins by referencing a new discovery of a possible "twin" of Earth only to question how NASA began that search, by which he introduces the idea of a different type of intelligence, maybe one different from the human view of intelligence. Then, Berreby brings in Acta Astronautica by Denise Herzing, a dolphin-behaviorist researcher. Herzing says that what NASA really needs to find new intelligence is not new technology or more advanced spacecrafts, but rather a different way of defining and measuring intelligence. Herzing has five ways of measuring intelligence: size of the organism's brain relative to the size of the rest of its body; how well it sends and receives information; how different each organism is from the other; "the complexity of the being's social life"; amount of interaction, particularly with members of other species. Herzing's list makes one wonder how intelligence was classified beforehand. Also, what if the last point, about amount interaction with other species, was zero for all other forms of life? Berreby points out that a lack of interspecific communication would make contact with other forms of life nearly impossible. Whether the search for new life will be successful or not is unknown, but Berreby's purpose is to convince the reader that it is "better to wrestle at the edges of comprehension" than to naïvley accept that all other species are like ours and that we should rethink how we search for other intelligent life. To accomplish his purpose, Berreby uses examples from experts, inclusive language, and rhetorical questioning. As previously mentioned, Berreby cites information from behaviorist researcher Denise Herzing, who is more credible on the subject of intelligence than Berreby himself. Additionally, the author uses "we" to unite readers against foreign intelligence so to speak. This creates a sense of us-versus-them, further emphasizes Berreby's idea that human intelligence (us) and alien intelligence (them) are to be measured differently. Lastly, Berreby uses a rhetorical question to lead into a quote from an Wallace Stevens, a poet. Overall, I believe Berreby showed why we need to change how we approach alien intelligence differently.